This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
4 Likes
Sure, current naval state is cause of “me”, cause finding yourself a personal scarecrow(and fight it) is way easy than demand the good changes in naval modes. If no one cares about naval in this community why should devs care .
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
4 Likes
So if “you” don’t like me, why no one created similar tread and discuss there ?
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
3 Likes
Where they do, doesn’t seem like “they” do ?
I think it coming back alive after some cool ships being added
What’s really remarkable is SL rewards in the midranges have as much as tripled in some cases this year, into 100k+ average games for premiums due to the forced 16v16 matches and: a) no one has really noticed; and b) overall playerbase numbers STILL didn’t go up (Statshark screenshot, top SL earners for April, AB):
People used to think Naval was a good SL-printer when Moffetts made 20K SL average per game. Now I would trade back a 50 per cent SL reduction for a 2x RP doubling, personally.
3 Likes
I don’t think that no one noticed this. You face more AI bots in battles nowadays (rewards for killing AI bots were also increased), so it makes sense to have higher kills per battle at average and increased SL rewards. These two things are closely related.
It’s just that most true Naval players played this game mode for fun and never cared about SL. And if someone plays Naval only to grind SL (e.g. with all their SL boosters), it doesn’t really change anything for them. Maybe it’s even better to stay silent about it. After all, the devs have the ability to change this situation at any time.
I don’t really see a connection here. If someone wanted to grind SL in Naval, the SL here was always much higher than in any other game mode. It doesn’t matter if the average SL per battle is 60k or 90k, it’s still much better than in Ground or Air.
Me too, but the RP system is designed to slow you down. SL system is not as important anymore, after the devs added SL boxes. Personally, I don’t buy SL boxes and I don’t care about SL gains.
2 Likes
Pretty sure if you saw SL rewards double or triple over one update cycle for a significant chunk of the vehicles in any other mode, at least ONE CC would have at least made ONE video about it. Just saying I haven’t seen one. And instead of the “wow, naval rewards really went up this year” thread, we have… this one (see also, “navy arcade sucks now” and “navy battles are very annoying atm”, both threads like this one that started after the SL boosts)
2 Likes
Just to make it clear. Top 25 ships that gained the most SL at average per battle in Naval Arcade:
| Ship | March | April | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kerch | 65308 | 138008 | +111,32% |
| Prinz Eugen | 62780 | 91789 | +46,21% |
| HMS Belfast | 59483 | 70972 | +19,31% |
| Marat | 58500 | 90686 | +55,02% |
| IJN Myoko | 58047 | 82708 | +42,48% |
| RN Pola | 55282 | 69021 | +24,85% |
| HMS Iron Duke | 52308 | 79173 | +51,36% |
| IJN Yamashiro | 51377 | 87314 | +69,95% |
| Duiplex | 46078 | 61629 | +33,75% |
| RN Leonardo da Vinci | 45861 | 57739 | +25,90% |
| USS Des Moines | 45631 | 59457 | +30,30% |
| IJN Mikuma | 45120 | 51859 | +14,94% |
| Zheleznyakov | 43441 | 44715 | +2,93% |
| USS Helena | 38442 | 42208 | +9,80% |
| SMS Nassau | 37827 | 53642 | +41,81% |
| Murmansk | 37014 | 46574 | +25,83% |
| Karlsruhe | 36943 | 52159 | +41,19% |
| Courbet | 36435 | 62056 | +70,32% |
| USS Detroit | 35257 | 44141 | +25,20% |
| USS Arkansas | 32865 | 56568 | +72,12% |
| USS Frank Knox | 32182 | 38413 | +19,36% |
| Duguay-Trouin | 30682 | 40463 | +31,88% |
| USS Moffett | 28678 | 30681 | +6,98% |
| Leningrad | 28212 | 33730 | +19,56% |
| Blagorodnyy | 26922 | 29743 | +10,48% |
Most ships didn’t gain “double or triple” SL. In fact only Kerch doubled its SL gains. The RP should follow the same pattern. While this is interesting (and quite obvious, considering less players and more AI bots in battles with increased AI bots rewards), I don’t see why CCs would talk about this.
3 Likes
You really think if tanks or jets didn’t see that kind of sudden SL jump, no one would have noticed before us, and you wouldn’t see more people playing, and no one would mention it in a half-dozen complaint threads before now? Okay, I guess, you believe what you want. RB SL/game gains 4.7-6.7 are significantly higher as well (again, April Statshark top 6 vehicles by SL/game):
does statshark provide detailled information about usage of planes in naval battles? I would expect a significant decrease since the aimbot update
3 Likes
It’s only as good as the service records it adds up, which don’t make that distinction.
1 Like
You can’t check this directly, but you can check the number of Naval kills for e.g. top 10 planes in Arcade:
| Plane | March | April | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pe-8 | 16891 | 11411 | -32,44% |
| A-36 | 14895 | 9501 | -36,21% |
| SB2C-5 | 14386 | 9340 | -35,08% |
| B-34 | 13528 | 11252 | -16,82% |
| A-20G-25 | 11522 | 9549 | -17,12% |
| B7A2 | 10518 | 7855 | -25,32% |
| F6F-5 | 10259 | 6128 | -40,27% |
| Ju 87 D-3 | 9741 | 6271 | -35,62% |
| P-61C-1 | 9713 | 9732 | +0,20% |
| F4U-4 | 9541 | 8630 | -9,55% |
Apart from the P-61C-1, there was a significant reduction in the number of Naval kills by planes.
Just keep in mind that there was a huge reduction of Naval Arcade players from March to April (-25% of players).
There are also a few maps in Air Arcade, where you can destroy Naval AI targets, but this shouldn’t change too much between months, and most players don’t even focus on Naval AI targets in Air Arcade (it’s not worth to kill them).
3 Likes
thx, thats kind of the information I am looking for. The decrease of kills by planes seems to be much more as the percentage of player numbers decrease.
1 Like
what do you think about a proposal to adapt the aiming system (as long as they don’t revert the aimbot completely)?
Actually the precision of even the first salvo at large distances is insane.
The precision of calculation the distance and movement of the target should depend on how many salvos already fired at the specific target. The actual precision should be reached maybe after the 5. salvo and is resetted when choosing another target. In the ui a precision indicator should show the actual status of the target acquisition. So there is still a chance to hit the target with the first salvo but with much less probability. This corresponds to how shooting worked in classic naval artileery and should apply on every ship with director.
Even in arcade mode GJ trys to have a semi-realistic approach to model the specific characteristics of vessels and naval warfare. The announced tune-down on ai-aa in the next update is a first step back in the right direction - more have to follow
1 Like
A 25% (26.5% actually) reduction in games played between those two measurement periods would suggest about as many increased as decreased in that sample. (link) Five were higher than baseline, five lower. Doesn’t by itself suggest a lower aircraft effectiveness.
Interestingly, naval kills by plane in RB, which also decreased in total games in the same period (but by a lower amount) actually saw MORE naval kills by the top ship-killing aircraft in April though.
2 Likes
You could vote too.
